That perfectly describes the choice of the earth's circumference choice as a metric basis Mike, arbitrary! From there a logical system was developed which very much suits the specialised fields like science, but as I've again pointed out, I'm not arguing otherwise.

 

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this to get it understood, the imperial system is not now in any way arbitrary precisely because it adjusts to suit actual factual needs, not random or on the basis of personal whim. Like metric, it's measures started from arbitrary points, but each then shifted to match real needs, thus removing the arbitrary elements.

.

Edited March 3, 201511 yr by flecc

Recipie for e-bike: add 1 3/4 cups of battery... Oh how precise...

 

So what is 4 cl of milk in oz (fluid oz of course) or in cups? And 2 grams of baking powder? My metric kitchen scale goes from 1 gram to 2 Kg in 1 gram increments, how can oz and lbs be more precise than that?

 

Remember that NASA put a Mars lander 20 metres bellow the surface of the planet because of an error in converting from the highly scientific feet to metric...

 

If you work in metric it is precise enough. If imperial rocks your boat do it but it makes calculation much harder in my poor old head.

 

Tony

So what is 4 cl of milk in oz (fluid oz of course) or in cups? And 2 grams of baking powder? My metric kitchen scale goes from 1 gram to 2 Kg in 1 gram increments, how can oz and lbs be more precise than that?

 

Proving my point Tony!

 

cl and kg are divisions and multiples of the basic measures, proving beyond any argument that the basic measures fail to match most human day to day needs.

 

Imperial measures do match most daily needs, which is why they persist as I've shown above with the facts from daily life.

 

And that's another reason why imperial persists, the terminology of metric divisions and multiples, multiple syllables often awkward to say are inconvenient in speech and so inconvenient when written that they are invariably abbreviated.

 

Ounce, pound, inch, foot, mile, pint, almost all of imperial measures are single syllables which roll easily off the tongue, precisely because they developed to match what ordinary humans want, rather than what the French scientists demanded.

.

Actually the only unit of terrestrial measurement which directly relates to the planet is the nautical mile. So one mile is one minute of one degree of longitude at the equator and about the same, one minute of arch for any meridian line. Easy to transpose to charts and maps.

 

The French idea was to try to measure the distance between poles on a line of longitude going through Paris and divide it by a convenient unit similar in size to the old yard. But they got it wrong, and anyway that is an arbitrary measure driven more by French grandiosity than practicality. French mariners still use the nautical mile or course.

It was Napoleon not the French, when French get blamed for anything it is usually his fault. Even if it wasn't him he'll get blamed anyway...

It's not really about which system is better but what you are used to. I've been using metric system whole my life. Imperial system makes no sense to me, instead of just scaling things you jump from unit to unit. From miles to yards to feet to inches. Actually is there a smaller unit than inch in everyday use, other than fractions of an inch? I guess there's a reason bicycle parts are measured in millimeters :-D

 

And the distances are the easy part. How do measure mass? I know pounds and ounces (which is pretty uncommon for a Finn). Again, an ounce is not that little, what's the next smallest unit?

 

And don't start with volumes and cooking..argh. Fl.Oz I see on soda cans? Is it roughly the same as an ounce? I always thought a cup is not that much, like coffee cup, but it's more like a mug (0.25 l or 2.5dl or 25cl or 250 ml, again easy - just scale to your liking).

 

We do use imperial units for some things, mostly inches for measuring some things (tires and TVs), but even that is changing now.

 

We do not order 'half a litre of beer', instead we order just 'a beer' or a 'stein' (=0.5 litres) or small beer/small stein (0,33 l). I don't know if stein is a correct or common word, I had to use Google to translate the Finnish word 'tuoppi'.

Actually is there a smaller unit than inch in everyday use, other than fractions of an inch?

There is, it's the thou (thousandth of an inch). I think I remember feeler gauges for spark plugs being measured in thous!

 

Michael

Mix and match. I use millimetres because they are more precise. I think in feet and miles for longer measurements, but don’t mix the two if I’m measuring something, and I use kilos and pounds and litres and pints interchangeably as I feel like it. I’ve even almost got used to bloody Celsius and can at least relate to 20 degrees being the point it starts to be a nice day. But I still prefer to think of eighty as getting warm and ninety as getting too bloody hot.

I mix and match very much like John, freely using whichever is best for a purpose, even to the extent of using both at the same time since I'm so familiar!

 

I joined a trade using both in my mid teens, long before UK metrication. In my twenties I was working in France for an engineering company for a while before returning to the UK and working in a mixed measure environment again.

 

Since then my career during the long period of piecemeal adoption of metric in the UK has moved between sectors already metricated and those still using solely imperial, all of these experiences contributing to my convertible skills in both.

 

So I'm impartial, I know what suits me best in each circumstance and am familiar with what suits the public at large through what they commonly use most.

 

The problem in my position here is that it's the wrong forum for this discussion. By it's nature the regular members will mainly be at least interested in engineering and science and often have a lot of skills in one or both. Therefore they have a pro metric bias, and that has shown in the way they've argued their case, avoiding my contention and emphasising the metric advantages instead, which were not in question. In a wide spectrum forum environment the position would be very different.

.

Edited March 3, 201511 yr by flecc

I'm with flecc on this, give or take an inch.

The problem in my position here is that it's the wrong forum for this discussion. By it's nature the regular members will mainly be at least interested in engineering and science and often have a lot of skills in one or both. Therefore they have a pro metric bias, and that has shown in the way they've argued their case, avoiding my contention and emphasising the metric advantages instead, which were not in question. In a wide spectrum forum environment the position would be very different.

.

 

This is very much off topic, but I find this discussion interesting. And in my previous post I tried to give you an example how ordinary people are used to metric system in their daily lives in countries where it has been established long time ago. It's all about in which system you are used to visualize your world. I have hard time visualizing 12", but no problem for 30cm.

There is, it's the thou (thousandth of an inch). I think I remember feeler gauges for spark plugs being measured in thous!

 

Michael

When I was an apprentice we had the even smaller measurement.

It was called a "Nats Cock" Very useful when making small adjustments.

And the Barn, as in barn door is which system?

This is very much off topic, but I find this discussion interesting. And in my previous post I tried to give you an example how ordinary people are used to metric system in their daily lives in countries where it has been established long time ago. It's all about in which system you are used to visualize your world. I have hard time visualizing 12", but no problem for 30cm.

 

Of course there is truth in this Sherman, but I know that, partly for evolutionary reasons, people have a preference for smaller numbers over larger ones. Some years ago I conducted two small experiments which clearly showed greater accuracy of visualisation is achieved when using the smaller numbers of imperial over the larger ones of metric.

 

The metric users taking part were Australians who had been brought up entirely with metric, the English taking part were those educated with Imperial, though having almost twenty years of living with metric.

 

I add that to the fact, as I showed previously, that even those educated entirely in metric in England often revert to the imperial when it's available. Though they've never been taught imperial, that happens when it's numbers are more convenient. For me the evidence is clear, people often prefer convenience over mathematical, technical or scientific advantages. That's understandable, the latter three are not continuously part of most daily lives and taking the easiest option makes sense.

And the Barn, as in barn door is which system?

 

Imperial, the French would say grange.

.

When I was an apprentice we had the even smaller measurement.

It was called a "Nats Cock" Very useful when making small adjustments.

Surely that's "Gnat's Cock"? Not to be confused with mosquitoes, ants, or the far larger measurement of "Bees Knee"?

Like most engineers of my generation, I still interchange between metric and imperial depending on my particular situation. For most practical matters, it's of little importance and a concrete base for a large garden shed will be sufficiently accurate for its purpose regardless of the methodology employed.

 

When it comes to fine and/or accurate work, theodolites, dumpy levels, lasers, internal and external micrometers do the job and feeler gauges and vernier calipers are also useful instruments. Fortunately, by and large, most of us will never have need of such tools to mend our bikes and our biggest challenge in mix-n-match issues is probably deciphering wheel rim and tyre/tube nomenclature so that we avoid picking up the wrong item in Halfraud's.

 

For a long time it seemed as if political correctness ordained that everything in our lives was destined to become metric and decimal but thanks to those wise people in Brussels, we really don't need to go that way at all and following the monumental judgement of the European Court a few years ago, our market traders are perfectly free once again to advertise and sell their wares in the same quantities as did their forebears. Recently, I was really pleased to walk through a street market with several greengrocers, all of whom had their fruit and veg marked up in pounds and stones.

 

Sadly, the chap from the north-east who campaigned to have that option but was prosecuted more than once by trading standards, failed to live long enough to see the re-introduction of the old terminology. He was vindicated, not by any court in the UK, but by the court central to the EU that so many in this country love to condemn for not having certain vested British interests at heart.

 

Overheard recently in Travis Perkins: Youthful yard boy - 'Ow much d'you want then?' Builder - "About 'alf 'undredweight oughta do it!' Yard boy - 'Ow much?'

 

Tom

Surely that's "Gnat's Cock"? Not to be confused with mosquitoes, ants, or the far larger measurement of "Bees Knee"?

 

Yes, Gnat it is. Strange though, rather like Gnu (wildebeest).

 

Makes one wonder why we don't have Gnewts, since wildlife seems attached to that silent G.

.

Overheard recently in Travis Perkins: Youthful yard boy - 'Ow much d'you want then?' Builder - "About 'alf 'undredweight oughta do it!' Yard boy - 'Ow much?'

 

Tom

 

Brilliant!

 

Reminds me of when I asked for a 5" masonry hole borer in my local tool hire. Older guy peered at his range and said, we only have them in millimetres. I immediately said 127 mm, which they did have.

 

Clearly he had no idea of how to convert on the spot and equally clearly the hole borer manufacturer worked to inches in having that exact mm size.

.

American

Other related units are the skilodge (1 mb, or 10−31 m2), the outhouse (1 μb, or 10−34 m2), and the shed (10−24 b (1 yb), or 10−52 m2), although these are rarely used in practice.[7]

Not quite metric although given in metric units !

American

Other related units are the skilodge (1 mb, or 10−31 m2), the outhouse (1 μb, or 10−34 m2), and the shed (10−24 b (1 yb), or 10−52 m2), although these are rarely used in practice.[7]

Not quite metric although given in metric units !

 

For large units the Wales is still in common usage. Although the Belgium is also popular.

For large units the Wales is still in common usage. Although the Belgium is also popular.

 

I've even seen the Isle of Wight used.

.

Sadly, the chap from the north-east who campaigned to have that option but was prosecuted more than once by trading standards, failed to live long enough to see the re-introduction of the old terminology. He was vindicated, not by any court in the UK, but by the court central to the EU that so many in this country love to condemn for not having certain vested British interests at heart.

 

That paints an inaccurately pro-EU picture of the case.

 

Steve Thoburn was convicted by Sunderland Magistrates' Court in 2001.

 

His appeals in this country were denied, as was his petition to the European Court of Human Rights.

 

He died in 2004.

 

The matter was dealt with by an EU directive in 2007, but it was no vindication of Thoburn, or anything to do with him directly.

 

The EU disliked his challenge to their authority just as much as our bureaucrats and courts did.

The matter was dealt with by an EU directive in 2007, but it was no vindication of Thoburn, or anything to do with him directly.

 

Although unconnected with him, the 2007 European Commission permission to use imperial weights indefinitely was a vindication of the courageous stand in favour of commonsense that he and many others made.

.

Surely that's "Gnat's Cock"? Not to be confused with mosquitoes, ants, or the far larger measurement of "Bees Knee"?

I was taught how to make small adjustments but not how to spell.